The discussion revolves around the nature of light, specifically its speed and the implications of relativity on the concept of time and existence. Participants explore whether light can be considered eternal due to its constant speed and the effects of time dilation.
Participants express differing views on the implications of light's speed and time dilation, with no consensus reached on the concept of eternity as it relates to light.
Limitations in definitions of "eternity" and the nature of existence are noted, as well as the dependence on interpretations of time dilation and relativistic effects.
Yes, as long as it didn't interact with anything. The cosmic microwave background consists of photons from the big bang (after about 300,000 years, when the universe cooled down enough so the photons would stop interacting). The long wavelength results from the expansion of the universe since then.Carnivroar said:If light always travels at the speed of light,
and at the speed of light, time stops --
does this mean that light is eternal?
In other words, if you were a particle of light, you would exist forever?
Carnivroar said:If light always travels at the speed of light,
and at the speed of light, time stops --
does this mean that light is eternal?
In other words, if you were a particle of light, you would exist forever?
ZealScience said:What do you mean by exist forever? Time dilation of relativity means time measurement is dilated i.e. what a man travels near the speed of light would be extremely long via the measurement of a resting man. But there's no point in eternal, eternal is quite like a classical sense. If you can live 90 years, whatever the speed you are travelling, you would live 90 years. Only in classical Newton's "time", there would be "eternality".